USAF Report Indicates Microburst A Factor In C-130 Firefighting Accident | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Airborne On ANN

Airborne 08.31.15

Airborne 09.01.15

Airborne 08.26.15

Airborne 08.27.15

Airborne 08.28.15

Airborne Hi-Def On YouTube

Airborne 08.31.15

Airborne 09.01.15

Airborne 08.26.15

Airborne 08.27.15

Airborne 08.28.15

EAA/ANN AirVenture Innovation Preview

AIP-#1 Vimeo

AIP-#2 Vimeo

AIP-Part 1 YouTube

AIP-Part 2 YouTube

Fri, Nov 16, 2012

USAF Report Indicates Microburst A Factor In C-130 Firefighting Accident

Crew Misjudged Wind Conditions While Flying In The South Dakota Black Hills

The crew of a MAFFS C-130 engaged in a firefight mission misjudged wind conditions and flew into the area of a microburst, which caused the airplane to impact the ground. That is the assessment of an Air Force accident panel investigating the crash.

The accident occurred July 1. In releasing an executive summary of the full report from the Air Force Mobility Command, Brig. Gen. Randall Guthrie said that the pilots' actions allowed two crewmembers in the back of the plane to survive the accident.

Stars and Stripes reports that the investigation found that that the C-130 Hercules tanker flew into a microburst just a few minutes after the pilot narrowly avoided an accident from another downdraft. Guthrie said that the crew had "struggled" to regain airspeed after their first drop of fire retardant, and the airplane encountered the microburst on the second run. He said that the prop from the number 4 engine struck the door near the back of the aircraft, and gave the loadmasters there an opportunity to escape. The four crewmen in the cockpit were killed instantly, Guthrie said.

The General said that the crew should have aborted the second run given the weather conditions, but added that they were not solely to blame for the accident. He said that a smaller lead plane did not adequately communicate the conditions to the MAFFS crew, but that considering that airplane had "barely escaped" impacting the ground, the lack of communications was "understandable." He also said that there was no ground control that could have provided a warning about weather conditions.

The full report has not been released. A safety investigation board will determine if any safety recommendations need to be made.

(USAF Image)

FMI: www.af.mil

Advertisement

More News

AeroSports Update: Rob Holland Wins The Gold

It Was A Big Day For The U.S. National Aerobatic Team As Rob Holland Takes The Gold In The Four Minute Free Program On August 29 It’s been reported on the International Aerob>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (09.02.15)

FAA NAS Systems Engineering Portal (SEP) This site renames the NAS Enterprise Architecture Portal and acknowledges a more robust systems engineering and planning perspective along >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (09.02.15): Landing Gear Extend Speed

The maximum speed an aircraft can be safely flown while the landing gear is extended.>[...]

Aero-News: Quote Of The Day (09.02.15)

"Business Aviation’s global CO2 emissions are very small, being approximately 2 percent of all aviation and .04 percent of global man-made carbon emissions." Source: Excerpt >[...]

Passengers Brawl On JetBlue Flight

Razor, Pepper Spray Used In Conflict Between Two Women On Board Two women on board a JetBlue flight from Kingston, Jamaica to JFK airport in New York got into a brawl as the flight>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2015 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC